Obsessed: Garrett Oliver on Brewing Better Beer

Nice article. Thanks buddy!

 

That was a great read.

Two things sorta ‘jumped out’ for me:

“What do you think defines a "good beer"? Is it dependent on styles? Or is there a common rubric you use when judging beers?

GO: Structure, balance, elegance, and deliciousness. That's what I want, each and every time.”

Needless to say that beer appreciation is a subjective thing but I give kudos to Garrett for that answer right there!

And:

“In our area, I'm really enjoying the beers by Hudson Valley,…”

One more ‘shout-out’ to Dave’s (@cavedave) region.

Cheers!

 

I would add "moreishness" , wanting another (or even several more) after you have finished ,often regardless if what else is there.

 

May I have your permission to use the word 'moreishness'? As an inveterate wordsmith I find it uniquely adept at describing exactly what is intended.

 

Those 3 brands are really how he sums up "the other stuff" that wasn't Budweiser in circa 1980 US? Jacob Ruppert Brewing Co. (Knickerbocker) and Haffenreffer Brewing Co. both closed when he was a pre-schooler, so he never drank the real beers.

Likely he means Haffenreffer Private Stock Malt Liquor (Haffenreffer Beer was still brewed by Falstaff/Narragansett, but it was a pretty small, local NE brand if not gone by '80). So, he picks 2 green bottled-malt liquors, Private Stock and Mickey's? (I'd gladly again drink that era's hoppy Private Stock over some of Brooklyn's "innovations").

Knickerbocker Beer by the time he was legal was being brewed by C. Schmidt's & Sons (via their purchase of the Rheingold-owned brands in the late 70s) and both brewers marketed it in the "economy" price segment. Yeah, it was cheap beer, but wasn't really any worse (or better) than Budweiser or any other typical US AAL of the period. If anything, the cheaper beers always tasted more "like water" than the popular and premium priced beers. C. Schmidt & Sons was also the last "big brewery" employer of master brewer Bill Moeller, who created Brooklyn Lager.

Sounds close to a synonym of August Busch III's definition of AB's term of "Drinkability" (from a 2006 WSJ article):

 

Hah, this is my exact same experience:

 

I first heard Michael Jackson using that word long ago, although I couldn't tell you if he coined it or if it's a bit of British English.

 

My first thought was: where does the "moreish" effect end and addiction begin?

 

He does get into that concept when he expands on what he means by elegance. Nice to see, too, because the notion is hardly in fashion in the US craft brewing scene at the moment. The dominant trendy styles tend to say everything they've got to say by the end of the 8th ounce.

 

Just a note to add that he already has significant presence around here by way of Chris and Charlie at Newburgh Brewery, and he and Brooklyn are instrumental in the creation and success of the Brewing Arts program at CIA, in Hyde Park. Haven't kept abreast of progress, but I know Brooklyn also is, or was, planning to create a satellite location on prime real estate in Newburgh that recently was opened to development.

 

Very informative article. Not only does he have something to say he knows how to say it.

 

Man he pretty much threw Kenny G under the bus there

 

Lots of great soundbites in that interview, my favorites are the following:

To me, the balance that a great brewer should have would be to have both—they have to have something to say and the ability to say it. I think there are probably only a few brewers that I know who can really do that, and I'm not claiming myself as one of them.

I think there are more than he lets on, but, yeah, they're not a dime a dozen either.

People will say that Anheuser-Busch can't make beer. Well, that's not true; they can make beer the same way that there's a lot of musicians that can make music. Kenny G can play the saxophone. It's not like he can't play it; it's just that you never in your life want to hear it. He has skills, but there's no soul in it. That's why no one that I know, anyway, is ever going to mention Kenny G as a great artist. Does he have chops, can he play? Of course he can play.

But if Kenny G couldn't play, we wouldn't even be mentioning him, now would we? I'd rather have a great technician that lacks creativity than a bad one that is wildly creative every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

One of the tricky things in making everyday beers is that it's not hard to make a beer that is impressive at the top of the glass. The first sip of an okay beer generally tastes pretty good, especially if you've had a long day. But the question is: What does it taste like when you're three-quarters of the way down the pint? If you can be really impressive there, when the person who's drinking it is already looking forward to their second pint of the same beer, now you've got something. I can't tell you how many dishes of food or how many beers I've had that start well, but by the time you're three-quarters of the way through, you're already tired of it. It just doesn’t come together a certain way.

An excellent goal for any brewer to have.

The best stuff you could get from Brettanomyces was more interesting than anything that you were going to get from traditional saccharomyces brewer's yeast

I wouldn't go THAT far, but, yes, Brett. species tend to be more characterful than their Sacch. counterparts.

And we're slowly chipping away at some truly fascinating Brett work. I think sours and Brett have a big future in the near-mainstream, or at least in the mainstream of craft brewing.

Sours? Yes. Brett . . . umm . . . probably not. Even though I'd like to see that happen, there just aren't ever going to be a lot of people who enjoy highly phenolic beer. Kinda like how not everyone enjoys smoked beers.

Which is great, because the current focus on IPA is pretty boring. I love IPA, but...

There will ALWAYS be a dominant beer style. People need to get over this sentiment. It's not like IPAs are to craft as AALs are to Big Beer. There are PLENTY of other choices out there.

 

Kenny G? John Coltrane?

Coltrane any day.

And you can definitely find similar comparisons in beers.

 

Come on, now, man. Both are technically proficient. One is just more innovative. Much, much more innovative.

Who are you thinking about?

 

Yeah, but that's too broad, too black or white of a comparison (which is what I was also thinking of GO's approach in the article). Maybe instead of Coltrane let's go with Michael Becker or Jay Beckenstein.

Fwiw, I've seen Kenny G when he was with the Jeff Lorber Fusion during their heyday, and he could definitely wow a crowd of music people in the right circumstances.

 

It's much more than innovative, it's that soul Garrett is talking about. I can feel Coltrane's music, Kenny G's makes me look for the frozen foods section.

Who, or what? There are far too numerous beers to just throw something out, but here's a start: Stella Artois and Ayinger Jahrhundert. Both are light lagers of European descent that will quench a thirst, but the Ayinger has so much more going on start to finish that you really take notice.

 

How about we split the difference with Paul Desmond?

Maybe that had more to do with Lorber than Kenny? Just sayin'.

 

Though I'd certainly agree, try to quantify "soul". Most will say, "I know it when I hear it", so saying that music "speaks to you" or "has soul" is different for everyone.

So, that makes both brewers (breweries) proficient at making beer, but one has a flavor profile that you gravitate towards more than the other.

Talking about a beer being "lively" or as being something that "enlivens or excites the palate" is the same thing as saying that a musician has "soul". The subjectivity of it is so ridiculously high that it becomes rather meaningless. Like comparing SRV to Buckethead or Jimi to Eddie Van Halen or Page to Clapton. All are great technicians, but everyone has their preferences.